WorldFamilies has changed our Forum Operating system and migrated the postings from the prior system. We hope that you’ll find this new system easier to use and we expect it to manage spammers much better. If you can’t find an old posting, please check our Legacy Forum to see if you can see the old posting there.

Ok, I had to revise the previous Busby 15 STR (14 used) age estimate I posted due to the DYS635's being posted incorrectly under DYS636 which after the correction reduced the founders age from 165.8 to 152.4 generations.

Ok, I had to revise the previous Busby 15 STR (14 used) age estimate I posted due to the DYS635's being posted incorrectly under DYS636 which after the correction reduced the founders age from 165.8 to 152.4 generations.

Ok, I had to revise the previous Busby 15 STR (14 used) age estimate I posted due to the DYS635's being posted incorrectly under DYS636 which after the correction reduced the founders age from 165.8 to 152.4 generations.

Ok, I don't know why I didn't show the extend the decimal precision on the variances so I re-posted the change as a newest version. I also added a combined M269 and S116(P312) chart then sorted all by variance on the last page.

The Founders age in Generations for just the M269 Haplotypes is 144.4. The S116(P312) only is calculates out to 141.1 generations. That is three generations and the generation Sigma show each to be 62.8 and 61.9 respectively.

On the plus sides, that is 4,331 to 6,090 years old for M269, and nearly the same range for S116(P312) 4,232 to 6,090 ybp. M269 has strong variance in ALB and ALPS excluding first three low sample number locations.

S116(P312) appears to have a few standouts in the largest variances. Throw out WAL(es)-S, BAS and GRE due to small samples; ENG(land)-SW and POR-C & SPA-C, and then SPA-all has the top spots.

S21(U106) has about the same generation age as S116 but checking out the population Variance (throw out BAS), has Norway in the lead as the most variance.

The Founders age in Generations for just the M269 Haplotypes is 144.4. The S116(P312) only is calculates out to 141.1 generations. That is three generations and the generation Sigma show each to be 62.8 and 61.9 respectively.

On the plus sides, that is 4,331 to 6,090 years old for M269, and nearly the same range for S116(P312) 4,232 to 6,090 ybp. M269 has strong variance in ALB and ALPS excluding first three low sample number locations.

S116(P312) appears to have a few standouts in the largest variances. Throw out WAL(es)-S, BAS and GRE due to small samples; ENG(land)-SW and POR-C & SPA-C, and then SPA-all has the top spots.

S21(U106) has about the same generation age as S116 but checking out the population Variance (throw out BAS), has Norway in the lead as the most variance.

Interesting.

MJost

Important for all to note that Norway has the highest U106 variance in the Busby study and that the data is new to that study and was not part of the Myres 2011 dataset.

Hey is there anything else out there that would dispute this Kingship of M269 and S21 in Norway? The S116(P312) was so strong in the southern Isle, I see a dominate footprint in the North Sea area of the origin of the two subclades of M269 that hugged the coast line from Norway to the south western part Wales, which assumes a strong North Sea coastal Continental presence as well.

... Hey is there anything else out there that would dispute this Kingship of M269 and S21 in Norway? The S116(P312) was so strong in the southern Isle, I see a dominate footprint in the North Sea area of the origin of the two subclades of M269 that hugged the coast line from Norway to the south western part Wales, which assumes a strong North Sea coastal Continental presence as well.

Mark, U106 is being discussed in the "early U106" thread. Please join and comment on the data you see of U106's origin and ancient migration paths. This is critical. If U106 was along the North Sea early in its ancestry then the probability gravity pulling L11's origin toward the Atlantic facade increases greatly even though many only associate it with the Anglo-Saxon Invasion era as far the Isles go, and Germanic languages and peoples in general.

MikeW and other in the past have questioned several issues such as selection of STRs to be used, the number of those, and others. Linear stabilization of various STRs into a deeper ancestry was discussed.

In looking at the Busby 15 STRs, I used the L21 database as another clade as reference. I noticed that the L21 age calculated using the same STRs (14) vs 111(100) was virtually the same....

MikeW and other in the past have questioned several issues such as selection of STRs to be used, the number of those, and others. Linear stabilization of various STRs into a deeper ancestry was discussed.

Fifteen Y-STRs with mutation rates, range of alleles and estimate of duration of linearity. All STRs investigated in this study are shown with their mutation rates (μ), estimated from Ballantyne et al. [33], and range of observed alleles, R, with 95% CI is taken from the YHRD [34]. θ(R)/2μ is an estimate of the duration of linearity of an STR."

In this an excerpt of that table with the duration of linearity column. I added the "S127"s and "xxx"s to show what markers he used in his S127(L11) STR variance calculations and which ones appeared to be too short in duration according to his own method to go back over 5000 years.

The problem that Busby has brought forward is the saturation or slow down in observable mutations for certain STRs the further back in time you go. The linear durations above don't agree with Heinilla's but I actually trust Heinilla's more.

Anyway, the point I would have is more STRs are better. In my experience with cross-validating subclades within R1b, where we know for certain which are older within the phlyogenetic tree, I had better consistency when using a large number of STRs, like in the 30's and above. Below that I had occurrences where a haplogroup that had to be younger (i.e. U198 versus U106) ended up being more diverse than its grandparent. My observations where that we did NOT need that many haplotypes in the sample with a high number of STRs. Once you get up to 50, and even above 20 to some extent, the relationships between haplogroups tend to stabilize and match the phylogenetic tree.

It's probably a good thing for someone to write a paper on... the trade-off between number of haplotypes and depth of data.

Balloons - M269 Red to Yellow to Green High to Low grouping of Variances

Pins -P312 Red to Yellow to Blue High to Low grouping of Variances

What does this clinal distribution most likely reflect?

MJost

Except for P312 in western Iberia the high points seem rather spotty. If I had to make a conclusion about anything here it would be P312 did not originate in Italy or the Alps.Thanks for sharing your map.

Balloons - M269 Red to Yellow to Green High to Low grouping of Variances

Pins -P312 Red to Yellow to Blue High to Low grouping of Variances

What does this clinal distribution most likely reflect?

MJost

Except for P312 in western Iberia the high points seem rather spotty. If I had to make a conclusion about anything here it would be P312 did not originate in Italy or the Alps.Thanks for sharing your map.

If you drop the first three highest variances for S116(P312) Wal,BAS & GRE, the next eight with significant HTs seem to point to the Atlantic Coast cline as shown largest to smaller variance values